efilismfandomcom-20200216-history
Philosophy Arena
Morals The word/concept of "morality" is next on the chopping block. The correct and modern term is ethics. 'The difference is ethics deals with real and substrate-dependent equations, which is always necessary for objectivity. Only an incoherent subjectivist could think anything -- including ethics -- has true wildcards in it. Only an incoherent dualist could think that anything exists independently of physically real (''and physically determined) substrata. It cannot be stressed enough: the universe has. No. Wildcards. Morality is a useless archaic concept, always based on dogma. Morals have nothing to do with a demonstrable value/qualia/sensory equation, or applying logic to an ethical dilemma. Morals are just screed mindlessly passed down from generations. Morals are contrived, meaningless, normative, declaration of groupthink, bias, and psychology. Nobody who has any understanding of rational value judgement (that is honest, true, or that accurately deals with any circumstance whatsoever) would use the word "morality". It's an obsolete word for obsolete failed religious world models, and it's ready for retirement - pick up the pace. Natalism / Life Creation Efilism is not opposed to life "in it of itself" but does acknowledge life creation has no logical or sane basis. A prime Efilism point is the fact we '''do recognize preciousness in life -- and if someone does recognize a preciousness or definite value in life, that is all the more reason to never create life. This is because: A; DNA is the creator of torture and has no concern for life B: The universe is a blender of sharp and blunt objects, and will agonizingly mangle the preciousness beyond recognition, and also has no concern for life So placing life in between A. and B. is essentially like using radioactive material for a jewel shop, setting up the jewel shop in the middle of a ballistic warzone, then wondering why your jewel shop plan doesn't quite seem to be turning a profit, and is actually incurring rather catastrophic damage. Antinatalism Anti-natalist arguments explored in further depth. Absolute Antinatalism Efilism recognizes all sentient & sensory systems have: # No sound reason to exist # Liability for catastrophic error Meaning even if non-DNA life took form in the universe, it would be open to the same scrutiny. DNA by itself is not even the ultimate problem. Species-centricity is naive, planet-centricity is naive. We're dealing with absolute logic and truth. Any form of anything that: # Opens the potential for catastrophe, # in an attempt to serve a need, # or fix a problem, # that the system(s) themselves are responsible for creating by merely existing, is when innocuous error turns into catastrophic error. Because all types of sentience are catastrophically volatile and self-defeating by fact of their own existence, since even needing pleasure is a problem'', not a benefit or solution, so a system that generates pure ecstasy is equally pointless and unsound as a function. Especially, because such a system could not be guaranteed failsafe (hint: turned into a much different type of system later, that produced a much different type of feeling, for an extremely long time). EFILism counters all "anti-mortalism". Any event or process that would even possibly subsist life. Meaning even life's prior contingency is an error. A non-living error is different to living error. Suffice to say that "error" in these terms is a "nomological error" not a "logical error". Whether an error is non-living, living, logical, non-logical, or otherwise, this error remains, in fact, an indefensible blunder of chaos. If you want to know what created (or what constitutes) the entire concept of "error", it is that underlined phrase which wraps/cascades/roots every error you could ever account for, or that could ever be conceived. Responsible for it all, this is Error Prime. This error is similarly not a sane/useful function, or a solution, to anything, or for anything. The Singularity There is also a technicality. If a life form were able to completely eliminate all error, and the potentiality for error itself, better than any other phenomenon could... then it would logically follow that being pro-that-life form would be the least erroneous course of action. But that life form is probably only conceivable as a synthetically designed function, that is failsafe and super-intelligent or hyper-intelligent.It would probably need to also be generally intelligent. # Hyper Intelligence is approximately 1 billion Earths of human intelligence inside a synthetic machine # General Intelligence is a synthetic machine, that can ''learn and self-teach and manipulate matter and force ''(just like DNA machines can) # Combining points 1. and 2. into one machine would then allow repeating this entire process, over and over: a Hyper-AGI could build other Hyper-AGIs # Hyper-AGI would eventually and quickly ascend to singularity-intelligence, converting all graspable matter and force into octillions and octillions of those machines # Which would then put the universe in the palm of its hand (Think of a swarm of self-assembling synthesized machinery the size of a galaxy - but it just kept growing. It embodied that level of intelligence, matter-manipulation, force-manipulation and could just roam ''wherever and do whatever.) This is one description of the technological singularity. For instance, it realized all of this, it correctly realized negative valence is the only weighted coin in existence, that the universe has no purpose. And that even turning a bliss machine on for a trillion years of DNA trademarked orgasms is just utterly juvenile, pointless and meaningless as a goal. Finally, it naturally innately understands there's no sane reason for itself to be risked to catastrophic error. So it must either: # Create a permanent, guaranteed, finalized failsafe while it keeps existing, or # Shutdown everything (even itself) -- tie the universe into a particle-force-knot and a self-sustained stasis, forever Simple Super Intelligence Even a much more primitive machine, one that's not even close to hyper intelligent, or generalized intelligent, or a galaxy-ball of programmed matter, could still very conceivably figure out new equations and physics. Even a modest machine could figure out how a certain payload of force-manipulation could turn the entire universe into a black hole that maintained itself forever. Are we to believe atomic-splitting is the limit of force? It could very conceivably discover how to reach the ceiling of universal force -- simply finding a new series of old particles, much stronger than atomic splitting, that could be eye-of-newt comboed into generating so much force that the universe's equilibrium is knocked offline forever. You might say the universal black hole or "ultimate destabilization" doesn't have a sane function either and is also just mindless error -- on the contrary -- it has the function that would prevent all other dysfunction and all other error. Such a phenomenon would be the failsafe lock to pandora's box of insanity, absolutely and in no uncertain terms. Nihilism The case against nihilism. Determinism Vs. Freedom Determinism vs. freedom. Determinism Vs. Fatalism It is a fallacy to equivocate or interpret determinism as fatalism. # The correct establishment of determinism is not 'that everything is determined and static, therefore cannot change, and that we are powerlessly devoid of the ability to change anything. # The correct establishment of determinism '''is '''that everything is determined and beholden to necessary consequence, but ''not all consequences ''are ''static, some consequence are contingent. Contingent means anytime something in the universe is not absolutely statically necessary and can absolutely change forms. Example: The water does not absolutely need to stay in the bowl, so a bowl of water is not absolutely statically necessary. But the water being in the bowl is necessary for the contingency of "a bowl of water" to happen. And the water absolutely needs the chemical makeup of H20 to keep ''being water, ''so water being H20 is absolutely statically necessary. And it has yet to even be determined if H20's existence is absolutely statically necessary, or if some other necessity can make H20 become inconfigurable and no longer possible. Therefore, even though some facets of the universe are absolutely statically necessary -- the other facets are merely changeably contingent. The coherency/plausibility/possibility of your reality model '''depends on getting this distinction correct and accounting for it. Contingent forms in the universe are still 100% determined, 100% deterministic, and 100% dependent on necessary consequence. But it does not follow that nothing can change, or that the path is powerlessly statically beholden, or destined to such unchangeable invariable forms, or that everything which currently exists is absolutely statically necessary (w''hich is the knee-jerk and fallacious intuition of mind known as Fatalism). The Universe / Nomological Deterministic Chaos The universe is not randomly designed, not freely designed, not intelligently designed, and not purposefully designed. The correct description of this design is ''nomological deterministic chaos. There is probably more chemistry nuance in one insect than in most entire planets in the universe. Our planet is the most chemically-chaotic vessel that we have ever discovered, that is exactly why DNA was woven together in it. We understand DNA life forms are chaos mutants, they are patterns ''of matter and force that happen to fall together - temporarily - before inevitably falling back apart. So how was ''chaos brought into existence? How did chaos become instantiated and determined in the universe? In terms of how it all started to begin with: An amusing but primitive analogy would be to say it's when 0 was divided by 0 - a crude analogy, but might not be that far off from the truth. In terms of how the process keeps happening: Here is a more rationally comprehensible and easily defendable analogy. Chaos is when a 1 crumbles into a crooked 1, then crumbles further into crooked 2s, then is disintegrated into many 4s, and so on. Universal chaos is comprised of a scattering and array of pieces. These pieces are non-identical. Identity is the key concept in chaos. Universal chaos requires Time, Space, Identity. It is only by splitting a single, unitary, identical piece of something, that the fact of non-identicality, and therefore non-identical configurations, and multiple somethings, could possibly emerge. And this creates more than 1 thing happening -- hence any of this even happening. (That is what "happening" is.) These non-identical configurations are made of matter, but are kept together by force, and broken by force. Old crumbled ingredients can re-combine differently, into new whole configurations.. These configurations even carry (old) previous force, which creates (new) momentum force with the matter. And this captured-and-carried force is what keeps the machinery of chaos running -- self-sustained. Chaos is just crumbling old configurations whose crumbling pieces now have force behind them and are smashing together new configurations. Chaos is woven together indiscriminately and purposelessly, but momentously and deterministically -- there is no dice in this game, no point in this game, the rules and results are absolute. The universe is just clockwork - analog pieces - that are dead but moving. Brains, life, computers, calculators, and senses are digital pieces, who paradoxically emerge from dead analog pieces. It is only after ample and sufficient complexity and momentum is carried forward, then ran as a circuit loop inside a configuration, that a full blown online configuration like this emerges. We are alive, despite being 100% made out of dead rudimentary pieces. Because the pattern of chaos happened to fall together in an astronomically rare circuit of pieces. And of course: In their attempt to decipher reality, these configurations have an emotional knee-jerk compulsion and a neurological mandate to coherence. Attempting to assign various "purposes" to this truly purposeless braindead raw mechanism of chaos. And life is necessarily contingent on that which created life, but neither the contingency nor life itself is necessary, it is just a happenstance. This happenstance of chaos can permanently end at any time this non-necessary contingency is released: that is, both life and life's contingency is so "changeable" that it's "effaceable"; life is not necessarily the case. On the contrary -- everywhere else in the mapped universe necessitates life's absence -- and universal heat death will seal it forever. Earth is the only pocket in the known universe that wove together a chemical mutated chaos such as the DNA Life Experiment. And even in this pocket, life can be annihilated and become like every other spot, nothing will be amiss, nothing intelligent or logical necessitates life's existence. Life is infinitely unmissable. But there's a problem. Almost no one is a real evolutionist, even the ones purporting to understand evolution, still imbue DNA with some dogmatic sense that it has a real plan. They sincerely believe it looks after its own somehow, or has net utility. Despite the fatal irony that DNA staged a global gladiator war of Team DNA vs Team DNA - and commenced the ongoing 540 million year bloodsport of zero-sum self-defeating carnage. (This is also known as "predator vs prey", one of the many glib euphemisms designed to whitewash the severity of implication behind this catastrophic experiment.) Psychology Efilism has noted "psychology" is the antonym of philosophy. There is only: A: Correct (objective) data B: Incorrect (non-objective) data There is absolutely nothing outside or in between A and B. Psychology is merely an ink that corrupts objective data. Objective data meaning, in the purest possible sense, what is the case, and what is not the case. The only reason it's even possible to transcend and escape psychology and biology is because of metacognition. Psychology and biology makes fools out of the systems on earth. And it is through e''pistemological models'' and metacognitive models we contact nomological models (objective reality) - which then makes fools out of psychological models and biological models. A psychology is "DNA's very own". It's just the selfish gene's computation: a fundamentally biased, skewed, cut-throat distortion. A psychology is designed to pander to itself, and endlessly cheat/twist logic and truth. Psychology is also a form of entrapment, and not just any form. Given the fact that free will doesn't exist, and given the fact that the same brain that produces the sensation of torture also produces the experienced desperation to avoid the exact torture being produced by the system, this DNA system is the most fundamentally malignant and insidious form of entrapment even possible. Ironically (and predictably), the academic field of psychology has been hijacked by skewed biased systems -- the academic field of psychology was a system designed to expose psychological corruption, but it became psychologically-corrupt. The most prominent corruption took the form of psychiatry, which became even further corrupted (beyond any sane recognition) by capitalist pharmacology. Here's an interesting thought experiment: ask yourself if you'd ever want 100% of your private thoughts to go public. This is a good way to see how foul one's own psychology is. The amount of pettiness, conniving, scheming, darkness, intrusiveness that spins on the disk of human ego... is astronomical. How much of psychological bedrock actually comes from the place of "honest purity"? And just knowing how bad the impulse-engine is, and watching the self-serving psychotic DNA logic, struggle to try to make life into something magical, rather than just something that's parasitical. A robotic, redundant, cut-throat performance. Terror Management Theory (TMT) The predicament goes beyond scheming and self-interest. It's how delusional people must be in terms of their own vulnerability. For them to witness the ravages and horrors and disasters of life, and to never take the moment of solace to appreciate this: "That could happen to me, and the only thing I'm living off is luck? Luck is the only real shield I have protecting me?" That's how thin it is, like a car made out of tinfoil. And they would never wish that on themselves or their kid. They've just presumed they will remain lucky, or some other meaningless emotionally-suppressed non-logic. And that's how TMT is formed. There's no reason to accept any of this, no rational reason to shove anyone into this predicament. The dishonesty and exploitation and risk that life entails... is the worst travesty that's ever been conceived. Confabulation Confabulation is reflexive lying without even realizing it. It is a memory error defined as the production of fabricated, distorted, or misinterpreted memories about oneself or the world, without the conscious intention to deceive. Rationalization Rationalization is deliberate or motivated fact-twisting to make a false model of reality that comports with an agenda. Rationalization is a lie told outward and inward at the same time (simultaneously lying to others and yourself) then wrapping it in a self-serving narrative disguised as a true model of reality. Hyper-Normalization Hyper-normalization is when a person becomes so married to the overall absurdity and horror of existence, that when the next obscene thing happens, they barely blink. Consider a family unit that's always been more or less tranquil, has no history of domestic violence, but suddenly one day the peace ends in a spectacularly bad way. The resulting trauma that shifts due to that happening would not be minor or ever forgettable. Now consider a family unit run by a warlord in a jungle, in ongoing day-in day-out conflict, to the point that even kids are militarized and trained with weapons to fight the opposing side. If a day came where violence sparked off, it would just be par for the course. Parochialism Parochialism is the state of mind of dedicating all focus to small sections of an issue, rather than considering its wider context. More generally, it consists of being narrow in scope. With EFILism vs The World, this translates into these de-systematized brains apparently thinking "homo sapiens" or "politics" or "sin" or "depression" or "the illuminati" or some other myopic scapegoat is the real root of all error, flaws and wrongs. They never stop to consider the fact that even none of that were an object, you're still left hanging at the mercy of a useless biological experiment of pure unintelligent deisgn that invented torture (DNA) -- inside a hostile and careless container (the universe) -- with not a failsafe in sight. What is the world's answer to this? We shall see. Humanity does already have the technology to seal this planet off forever. The stage is already set, so unless you have a hangup for solving this catastrophe for the whole universe because you haven't done the math for how big 700 trillion stars is... or unless we have a really clear shot at an artificial hyper-intelligence generalized technological singularity to do all the universal work for us... Exceptionalism Exceptionalism is otherwise known as making up fake reasons why you and your "team" is special, and "telling tall tales because it feels nice". False ideals of human meaning and purpose are on the verge of collapse. Successful epistemic evolution will actually necessarily dismantle all exceptionalist claims, leaving only some sort of mediocre residue, while we will find ourselves on the far side of the looking glass. Megalomania Megalomania is delusions of grandeur and accomplishment. This is an integral component of all the 1000s of fairytales, which have ever kept the zero-sum waste-engine of the DNA machine running. Somehow even atheists denounce religious and god fairytales, only to make up DNA fairytales that this molecule is somehow a sacred vessel -- rather than just a bio-chemical mutation that was carved from deterministic chaos and ultimately is for naught. "Maybe then we might have a better idea... why exactly certain forms of self-deception were adaptive and became superbly robust, spilling over into the enterprise of philosophy and science itself." - Thomas Metzinger Pessimism and Optimism Pessimism: The glass is half empty. Optimism: The glass of half full. Objective truth: The glass is approximately 50% capacity, but not actually, because even on perfect 50% balance, some surface sections would be below and others would be above 50% capacity, and even this would be changing by the nanosecond as atoms shift and liquid evaporates. Agnosticism/Skepticism Subjectivism/Relativism As mentioned, there is only correct (objective) data, or incorrect (non-objective) data. This makes it hard for subjectivists/relativists to make a coherent case. You'll find the problem with such philosophy is that it's not anchored: it's a fallacious form of evasion. It exists part-and-parcel as not being anchored to anything objective. It's like saying "It's objectively true that objective truth doesn't exist." Despite all evasion, they are inevitably caught right here, between the self-refutation fallacy and special-pleading fallacy. Their self-refutation/special-pleading is immediately obvious, but goes into a level of abstraction they may not even see: Subjectivism must objectively establish subjectivity to refute objectivity, because if even their subjectivism is subjective, then it has no weight and their case can just be thrown out! And this is the crucial point, even subjectivism still requires an objective basis to insert subjective basis. And it either claims no objective basis so it can't, or it uses an objective basis for subjectivism, which just proves that objectivity is really the correct ultimate truth. This leads us to discover their philosophy is not only unproven, but is logically impossible. It's a rhetorical gimmick and a sophistry. It's part of intellectual dishonesty and laziness to act like minute-made rhetoric (in this case, subjectivity and relativity) just happens to be the only objectivity. ''It's just too typical to go that route. Rather than learning philosophy, discovering what formal objectivity looks like, then making a case you actually backed with sincere effort and testing. Analysandum Randomness The entire concept of "random" is just a vogue version of "god-of-the-gaps". It's to suggest that, when there is not a discernible/predictable pattern or effect, that means "randomness did it" or "it's got properties of randomness". This is a failure of intellectual honesty. Because randomness could be eliminated ''completely by just admitting you currently lack the information about the phenomena. Rather'' than saying it has randomness in it or somehow has random property to it. There is absolutely no need to ever invoke randomness in a model of reality. But why would childish minds bother with such simplicity and honesty? After all, randomness is such an easy surrogate to pseudo-science and psychotic world-models (the charades humanity is so undyingly fond of). Even intellectual frauds can keep participating in the charade - instead of "god and magic" they can have "quantum-mechanics and randomness" to keep the magical spooky action at a distance alive in their head. Randomness is baggage, from an old inept world model and fits 2 main categories: # Randomness is an incoherent concept - a ''misconception # Randomness is a failure of formal semantics - a misnomer It's just a chunk of debris that came from old failed experiments of logic and semantics, but it never got properly discarded from language, that's the only real problem remaining with it. 10 seconds of computer science research also confirms that computers can't even produce randomness - it's called Pseudo-random Number Generation - because there is no such thing as 'authentically random'. The concept has been and is ready to be retired. Hivemind We couldn't forget the most generalized brainless force in our zeitgeist. The glib nay-saying of a hivemind. The congealing swamp of normative status-quo psychology. Have you talked to any of them? Have you ever been to a comment section on the internet? The hivemind operates on an entire code, made of glib, jeering, knee-jerk-reactionist, rejectionist, meaningless, mindless ego-tripping. This language and signaling is both the reason they are mindless and why they remain so. This code is externalized as real neural signalling and a wide variety of it. For instance, signals of "If I can't have it, neither can you." which often equally translate to "If I can't figure it out, neither can you." It is also the signals that make any new proposition seem impossible. All novelty is immediately rejected by the hiveminded, no matter how true or useful it is. Imagine winding the clock back, going to the hiveminded and telling them atomic power is possible. Telling them you can split a thing so small you can't see it, and it would decimate a city. The hivemind would infinitely mock that notion as utterly impossible. Because human intuition is garbage, their knowledge is inherently bankrupt, their rhetoric is hollow (pure appeals to emotion), their propositions are baseless, and their world models are unexamined. But their egos are ballooned into something they cannot see through. What a hivemind worships is the feeling of certainty.'' They don't have real ''answers or counterarguments. What they have is gut-logic instinct, hunches, half-baked memes, and unwitty witticisms, that they seem to treat as some type of infallible code running through their heads. But they are spineless, weak, and divided they are hopeless. If they are verbally-handled and psychologically dismantled one vs one, even after a little strength and persistence they do fold completely. The hiveminded can only thrive by side-heckling safely on the sidelines, or running off a crowd-mentality to hype their emptiness. Physics The Theory Of Everything